Australian Politics Forum - Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #135 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:13am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:10am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:31am:

Why do some of you ppl call the government "socialist" and yet want them to fund private businesses?

SOB

It's the party in Govt that is being branded 'socialist'.

GOVT is NOT funding private business. Funding is a handout.

Think of Private schools as a sub-contractor. They are being paid for delivering a service that the Govt is obliged to provide. Instead of costing them $1 per head it costs Govt 30c per head. The 70c they save can be spent elsewhere on other essential Govt services.

Think of it another way, say the Govt nationalised schools. They would have to find that extra 70c per head and also find additional money to accommodate the extra 30% of student numbers.

Unless they went into massive unsustainable debt other Govt services would be cut. Dole would be less, pensions would be less etc etc etc

Savvy? Huh

Sub contractors are private businesses .... and that analogy doesn't apply anyway ... govt subsidise schools, not pay them .

the rest of your claims are unsubstantiated claims put out by the private schools themselves .. I'm sure it helps them when arguing for extra funding.

well we could get govt estimations instead but you have clearly shown that you only accept figures that support your position so why would anyone bother?

the problem when you start to invent arguments is that you are often left looking like an idiot ... and you look like an idiot.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #136 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:15am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:22am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 6:12am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:05pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:31am:

Why do some of you ppl call the government "socialist" and yet want them to fund private businesses?

SOB

It's the party in Govt that is being branded 'socialist'.

GOVT is NOT funding private business. Funding is a handout.

Think of Private schools as a sub-contractor. They are being paid for delivering a service that the Govt is obliged to provide. Instead of costing them $1 per head it costs Govt 30c per head. The 70c they save can be spent elsewhere on other essential Govt services.

Think of it another way, say the Govt nationalised schools. They would have to find that extra 70c per head and also find additional money to accommodate the extra 30% of student numbers.

Unless they went into massive unsustainable debt other Govt services would be cut. Dole would be less, pensions would be less etc etc etc

Savvy? Huh

its a very good analogy. the trouble is the lefties dont like the fact that private schools outperform public ones by a massive margin.

Nope. What the "lefties" dont like is private businesses getting funding and taking money away from places that actually need it.

SOB

I know that you wont understand the answer but another reader may so here goes.

there are for example 2000 students needing to go to school. If they all go to public school it will cost $22Mpa. If they all fo to private school it costs the govt $15M - a saving of $7M.

But you say just dont pay the $15M at all and make the saving even more! However there is a problem in that simplistic argument. The vast majority of private schools are low-fee ones of around $3000 per student per year. Take out the govt funding and parents would be up for $10,500pa which the vast majority could not afford and the rest will not. Estimates are that around 80% (or more) of private students would return to the public system. So to alter that calculation accordingly, you take back the $15M in private subsidies and then have to pay $17.6M extra in public school money to handle all the extra students

do you see how this works? the private sector actually saves the govt money which is why no govt, no matter how ideologically determined, is going to change this system.

The debate ALWAYS centres on 10 elite schools and never on the vast majority and is why the debate is never honest and why it is always ignored by govt.

and if the govt. provides schooling for those 2000, but 100 decide to go private, that is their choice and it is up to the parents to pay and not the govt. You keep reverting to that figure that govt.s save but cannot find anyone other than private schools who come up with that figure ....

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #137 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:24am

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:12am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:09am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:56pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Not at all.
Funding should be the same flat level to all kids - public and private.

No child should not receive public funding for their education.

Then private schools should charge on top of that and state schools just keep to the funding level.

That way parents who choose to fund their child through fees get more - because as you all know and agree - you should always get something for your money.

What on earth would be the point in paying for an education when the state is funding other kids for free if its no better??

the public school funding is there ... for all the kids ... you chose to forgo it for private that is your choice and you should pay.

lets hear you support that principle if govt decided that there shoudl be no child-care subsidy. you want childcare? pay for it yourself! And I'm tipping once your kids reach school age you might find your attitude to private school funding will change too when you haev to choose between the bogan public school and the first-rate private school.

bugger your an idiot ... I do pay for my kids childcare. Any subsidy I may get I get because they give it to me, not because I sought it. That's the way the childcare system is and I play by their rules. .. if they remove the subsidy it won't change a thing for me.

Don't try to judge me by your standards, just because you're a selfish old goat who only cares about themselves it doesn't mean I do as well.

so when you complain (rightly) that andrei is self-absorbed, does it ever occur to you that your entire position on this issue is about how it affects you? You wouldnt know a principle if it bit you and frankly, I doubt very much that you would be happy if the govt removed the childcare subsidy.

but once again, you have utterly failed to address the topic as expressed. you clearly dont understand the fiscal argument to retaining private school subsidies. you actually DONT understand it.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #138 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:27am

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:15am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:22am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 6:12am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:05pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:31am:

Why do some of you ppl call the government "socialist" and yet want them to fund private businesses?

SOB

It's the party in Govt that is being branded 'socialist'.

GOVT is NOT funding private business. Funding is a handout.

Think of Private schools as a sub-contractor. They are being paid for delivering a service that the Govt is obliged to provide. Instead of costing them $1 per head it costs Govt 30c per head. The 70c they save can be spent elsewhere on other essential Govt services.

Think of it another way, say the Govt nationalised schools. They would have to find that extra 70c per head and also find additional money to accommodate the extra 30% of student numbers.

Unless they went into massive unsustainable debt other Govt services would be cut. Dole would be less, pensions would be less etc etc etc

Savvy? Huh

its a very good analogy. the trouble is the lefties dont like the fact that private schools outperform public ones by a massive margin.

Nope. What the "lefties" dont like is private businesses getting funding and taking money away from places that actually need it.

SOB

I know that you wont understand the answer but another reader may so here goes.

there are for example 2000 students needing to go to school. If they all go to public school it will cost $22Mpa. If they all fo to private school it costs the govt $15M - a saving of $7M.

But you say just dont pay the $15M at all and make the saving even more! However there is a problem in that simplistic argument. The vast majority of private schools are low-fee ones of around $3000 per student per year. Take out the govt funding and parents would be up for $10,500pa which the vast majority could not afford and the rest will not. Estimates are that around 80% (or more) of private students would return to the public system. So to alter that calculation accordingly, you take back the $15M in private subsidies and then have to pay $17.6M extra in public school money to handle all the extra students

do you see how this works? the private sector actually saves the govt money which is why no govt, no matter how ideologically determined, is going to change this system.

The debate ALWAYS centres on 10 elite schools and never on the vast majority and is why the debate is never honest and why it is always ignored by govt.

and if the govt. provides schooling for those 2000, but 100 decide to go private, that is their choice and it is up to the parents to pay and not the govt. You keep reverting to that figure that govt.s save but cannot find anyone other than private schools who come up with that figure ....

GOVT figures themselves show that they spend around $11,000 per student pa in the public sector while around $7500 per student in the private sector. Thats actual govt figures. Of course now we get back to the same old problem you have with government figures... you prefer blogs so I would refer you to the education union website where you can get all kinds of amazing (yet demonstrably false) information. You would love it!

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #139 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:35am

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:31am:

Why do some of you ppl call the government "socialist" and yet want them to fund private businesses?

SOB

It's the party in Govt that is being branded 'socialist'.

GOVT is NOT funding private business. Funding is a handout.

Think of Private schools as a sub-contractor. They are being paid for delivering a service that the Govt is obliged to provide. Instead of costing them $1 per head it costs Govt 30c per head. The 70c they save can be spent elsewhere on other essential Govt services.

Think of it another way, say the Govt nationalised schools. They would have to find that extra 70c per head and also find additional money to accommodate the extra 30% of student numbers.

Unless they went into massive unsustainable debt other Govt services would be cut. Dole would be less, pensions would be less etc etc etc

Savvy? Huh

Sub contractors are private businesses .... and that analogy doesn't apply anyway ... govt subsidise schools, not pay them .

the rest of your claims are unsubstantiated claims put out by the private schools themselves .. I'm sure it helps them when arguing for extra funding.

Most sub-contractors are private businesses but do you know what a "not for profit organisation" is John Smith?

Do you know why they get income tax exempt status and why their employees get additional income tax breaks?

They lever off the private sector and provide essential Govt services more efficiently and at massive savings to the budget. Shocked

NFPs undertake services that the Govt of the day is obliged to provide. They get funding from various sources but mainly from Govt. It goes down in the books as 'grant' funding from Govt but in actuality the Govt is sub-contracting its own work load to save taxpayer money.

Private schools are NFPs. They provide essential Govt services and whether you call their funding a subsidy, grant, contract receipts, wealthfare it matters not. The result is the SAME.

Aged care, respite care, palliative care, disability welfare, community childcare, employment & training, neighbourhood centres etc are the same. They all get Govt funding to provide Govt services in the same way as private schools.

Private schools are not businesses. As not for profits no one is making an earn from them. They do not have share holders where surpluses are distributed to.

Back to top

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #140 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:37am

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:33am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:56pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Not at all.
Funding should be the same flat level to all kids - public and private.

No child should not receive public funding for their education.

Then private schools should charge on top of that and state schools just keep to the funding level.

That way parents who choose to fund their child through fees get more - because as you all know and agree - you should always get something for your money.

What on earth would be the point in paying for an education when the state is funding other kids for free if its no better??

the public school funding is there ... for all the kids ... you chose to forgo it for private that is your choice and you should pay.

Even if everyone paid the same amount of tax you still wouldn't have a valid point.

Of course it's valid, simply arguing that ones point isn't valid without an explanation why it is not is in itself not a valid argument ...

if I provide for your kids and you decide to take your kids elsewehre why should I provide more?

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #141 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:38am

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:35am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:31am:

Why do some of you ppl call the government "socialist" and yet want them to fund private businesses?

SOB

It's the party in Govt that is being branded 'socialist'.

GOVT is NOT funding private business. Funding is a handout.

Think of Private schools as a sub-contractor. They are being paid for delivering a service that the Govt is obliged to provide. Instead of costing them $1 per head it costs Govt 30c per head. The 70c they save can be spent elsewhere on other essential Govt services.

Think of it another way, say the Govt nationalised schools. They would have to find that extra 70c per head and also find additional money to accommodate the extra 30% of student numbers.

Unless they went into massive unsustainable debt other Govt services would be cut. Dole would be less, pensions would be less etc etc etc

Savvy? Huh

Sub contractors are private businesses .... and that analogy doesn't apply anyway ... govt subsidise schools, not pay them .

the rest of your claims are unsubstantiated claims put out by the private schools themselves .. I'm sure it helps them when arguing for extra funding.

Most sub-contractors are private businesses but do you know what a "not for profit organisation" is John Smith?

Do you know why they get income tax exempt status and why their employees get additional income tax breaks?

They lever off the private sector and provide essential Govt services more efficiently and at massive savings to the budget. Shocked

NFPs undertake services that the Govt of the day is obliged to provide. They get funding from various sources but mainly from Govt. It goes down in the books as 'grant' funding from Govt but in actuality the Govt is sub-contracting its own work load to save taxpayer money.

Private schools are NFPs. They provide essential Govt services and whether you call their funding a subsidy, grant, contract receipts, wealthfare it matters not. The result is the SAME.

Aged care, respite care, palliative care, disability welfare, community childcare, employment & training, neighbourhood centres etc are the same. They all get Govt funding to provide Govt services in the same way as private schools.

Private schools are not businesses. As not for profits no one is making an earn from them. They do not have share holders where surpluses are distributed to.

I don't particularly care about their profits or lack thereof, it is still a private business. If it cannot sustain itself, it should not exist.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #142 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:42am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:27am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:15am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:22am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 6:12am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:05pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:31am:

Why do some of you ppl call the government "socialist" and yet want them to fund private businesses?

SOB

It's the party in Govt that is being branded 'socialist'.

GOVT is NOT funding private business. Funding is a handout.

Think of Private schools as a sub-contractor. They are being paid for delivering a service that the Govt is obliged to provide. Instead of costing them $1 per head it costs Govt 30c per head. The 70c they save can be spent elsewhere on other essential Govt services.

Think of it another way, say the Govt nationalised schools. They would have to find that extra 70c per head and also find additional money to accommodate the extra 30% of student numbers.

Unless they went into massive unsustainable debt other Govt services would be cut. Dole would be less, pensions would be less etc etc etc

Savvy? Huh

its a very good analogy. the trouble is the lefties dont like the fact that private schools outperform public ones by a massive margin.

Nope. What the "lefties" dont like is private businesses getting funding and taking money away from places that actually need it.

SOB

I know that you wont understand the answer but another reader may so here goes.

there are for example 2000 students needing to go to school. If they all go to public school it will cost $22Mpa. If they all fo to private school it costs the govt $15M - a saving of $7M.

But you say just dont pay the $15M at all and make the saving even more! However there is a problem in that simplistic argument. The vast majority of private schools are low-fee ones of around $3000 per student per year. Take out the govt funding and parents would be up for $10,500pa which the vast majority could not afford and the rest will not. Estimates are that around 80% (or more) of private students would return to the public system. So to alter that calculation accordingly, you take back the $15M in private subsidies and then have to pay $17.6M extra in public school money to handle all the extra students

do you see how this works? the private sector actually saves the govt money which is why no govt, no matter how ideologically determined, is going to change this system.

The debate ALWAYS centres on 10 elite schools and never on the vast majority and is why the debate is never honest and why it is always ignored by govt.

and if the govt. provides schooling for those 2000, but 100 decide to go private, that is their choice and it is up to the parents to pay and not the govt. You keep reverting to that figure that govt.s save but cannot find anyone other than private schools who come up with that figure ....

GOVT figures themselves show that they spend around $11,000 per student pa in the public sector while around $7500 per student in the private sector. Thats actual govt figures. Of course now we get back to the same old problem you have with government figures... you prefer blogs so I would refer you to the education union website where you can get all kinds of amazing (yet demonstrably false) information. You would love it!

are you having trouble sticking to the point?

If private schools can spend millions on tennis courts and pools, they can afford to pay for themselves. Of course it's cheaper to subsidise than public schools, the parents make up the difference. My point is that if parents chose to send their kids to private schools, they should pay the full amount and not just the balance.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #143 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:45am

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:24am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:12am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:09am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:56pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Not at all.
Funding should be the same flat level to all kids - public and private.

No child should not receive public funding for their education.

Then private schools should charge on top of that and state schools just keep to the funding level.

That way parents who choose to fund their child through fees get more - because as you all know and agree - you should always get something for your money.

What on earth would be the point in paying for an education when the state is funding other kids for free if its no better??

the public school funding is there ... for all the kids ... you chose to forgo it for private that is your choice and you should pay.

lets hear you support that principle if govt decided that there shoudl be no child-care subsidy. you want childcare? pay for it yourself! And I'm tipping once your kids reach school age you might find your attitude to private school funding will change too when you haev to choose between the bogan public school and the first-rate private school.

bugger your an idiot ... I do pay for my kids childcare. Any subsidy I may get I get because they give it to me, not because I sought it. That's the way the childcare system is and I play by their rules. .. if they remove the subsidy it won't change a thing for me.

Don't try to judge me by your standards, just because you're a selfish old goat who only cares about themselves it doesn't mean I do as well.

so when you complain (rightly) that andrei is self-absorbed, does it ever occur to you that your entire position on this issue is about how it affects you? You wouldnt know a principle if it bit you and frankly, I doubt very much that you would be happy if the govt removed the childcare subsidy.

but once again, you have utterly failed to address the topic as expressed. you clearly dont understand the fiscal argument to retaining private school subsidies. you actually DONT understand it.

maybe thats because I don't consider it a fiscal argument d1ckwad ...are you incapable of understanding basic english?... if parents want their kids to go they should pay .. that takes the fiscal argument about govt. spending out of the equation. Now if you have a reason as to why govt's should pay for a second layer of education when they already provide for it adequately, use it ... just don't tell me it's about money.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #144 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:50am

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:42am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:27am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:15am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:22am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 6:12am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:05pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:31am:

Why do some of you ppl call the government "socialist" and yet want them to fund private businesses?

SOB

It's the party in Govt that is being branded 'socialist'.

GOVT is NOT funding private business. Funding is a handout.

Think of Private schools as a sub-contractor. They are being paid for delivering a service that the Govt is obliged to provide. Instead of costing them $1 per head it costs Govt 30c per head. The 70c they save can be spent elsewhere on other essential Govt services.

Think of it another way, say the Govt nationalised schools. They would have to find that extra 70c per head and also find additional money to accommodate the extra 30% of student numbers.

Unless they went into massive unsustainable debt other Govt services would be cut. Dole would be less, pensions would be less etc etc etc

Savvy? Huh

its a very good analogy. the trouble is the lefties dont like the fact that private schools outperform public ones by a massive margin.

Nope. What the "lefties" dont like is private businesses getting funding and taking money away from places that actually need it.

SOB

I know that you wont understand the answer but another reader may so here goes.

there are for example 2000 students needing to go to school. If they all go to public school it will cost $22Mpa. If they all fo to private school it costs the govt $15M - a saving of $7M.

But you say just dont pay the $15M at all and make the saving even more! However there is a problem in that simplistic argument. The vast majority of private schools are low-fee ones of around $3000 per student per year. Take out the govt funding and parents would be up for $10,500pa which the vast majority could not afford and the rest will not. Estimates are that around 80% (or more) of private students would return to the public system. So to alter that calculation accordingly, you take back the $15M in private subsidies and then have to pay $17.6M extra in public school money to handle all the extra students

do you see how this works? the private sector actually saves the govt money which is why no govt, no matter how ideologically determined, is going to change this system.

The debate ALWAYS centres on 10 elite schools and never on the vast majority and is why the debate is never honest and why it is always ignored by govt.

and if the govt. provides schooling for those 2000, but 100 decide to go private, that is their choice and it is up to the parents to pay and not the govt. You keep reverting to that figure that govt.s save but cannot find anyone other than private schools who come up with that figure ....

GOVT figures themselves show that they spend around $11,000 per student pa in the public sector while around $7500 per student in the private sector. Thats actual govt figures. Of course now we get back to the same old problem you have with government figures... you prefer blogs so I would refer you to the education union website where you can get all kinds of amazing (yet demonstrably false) information. You would love it!

are you having trouble sticking to the point?

If private schools can spend millions on tennis courts and pools, they can afford to pay for themselves. Of course it's cheaper to subsidise than public schools, the parents make up the difference. My point is that if parents chose to send their kids to private schools, they should pay the full amount and not just the balance.

and pay for other kids to go to school as well through taxes.

So paying twice.

So some parents pay twice and other parents (unemployed) pay not once.
Genius. How fair.

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #145 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:53am

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:37am:

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:33am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:56pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Not at all.
Funding should be the same flat level to all kids - public and private.

No child should not receive public funding for their education.

Then private schools should charge on top of that and state schools just keep to the funding level.

That way parents who choose to fund their child through fees get more - because as you all know and agree - you should always get something for your money.

What on earth would be the point in paying for an education when the state is funding other kids for free if its no better??

the public school funding is there ... for all the kids ... you chose to forgo it for private that is your choice and you should pay.

Even if everyone paid the same amount of tax you still wouldn't have a valid point.

Of course it's valid, simply arguing that ones point isn't valid without an explanation why it is not is in itself not a valid argument ...

if I provide for your kids and you decide to take your kids elsewehre why should I provide more?

Yee-gods but that's the point Exclaim

You are not providing more funding you (as a tax-payer) are providing less. 70% less. Roll Eyes

Govt is chartered to provide education for every Australian child. Every Australian kid is entitled to the same education dollar from the Govt regardless of who their parents are or how the education is delivered.

Back to top

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #146 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:53am

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:50am:

and pay for other kids to go to school as well through taxes.So paying tw

everyone pays taxes .... once ou pay them you do not get a say in where they are spent .. no matter how much you bitch .. if you chose to send you kids to private school, that is your choice. ... I would suggest you don't if you are concerned that you are paying twice, it's quite simple.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #147 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:54am

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:53am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:37am:

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:33am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:56pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Not at all.
Funding should be the same flat level to all kids - public and private.

No child should not receive public funding for their education.

Then private schools should charge on top of that and state schools just keep to the funding level.

That way parents who choose to fund their child through fees get more - because as you all know and agree - you should always get something for your money.

What on earth would be the point in paying for an education when the state is funding other kids for free if its no better??

the public school funding is there ... for all the kids ... you chose to forgo it for private that is your choice and you should pay.

Even if everyone paid the same amount of tax you still wouldn't have a valid point.

Of course it's valid, simply arguing that ones point isn't valid without an explanation why it is not is in itself not a valid argument ...

if I provide for your kids and you decide to take your kids elsewehre why should I provide more?

Yee-gods but that's the point Exclaim

You are not providing more funding you (as a tax-payer) are providing less. 70% less. Roll Eyes

Govt is chartered to provide education for every Australian child. Every Australian kid is entitled to the same education dollar from the Govt regardless of who their parents are or how the education is delivered.

Finally!
Somebody understand the concept of providing Government funding to EVERY CHILD to be educated.

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75251
Gender: male

Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades
Reply #148 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:57am

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:53am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:37am:

Swagman wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 7:33am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 9:56pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Not at all.
Funding should be the same flat level to all kids - public and private.

No child should not receive public funding for their education.

Then private schools should charge on top of that and state schools just keep to the funding level.

That way parents who choose to fund their child through fees get more - because as you all know and agree - you should always get something for your money.

What on earth would be the point in paying for an education when the state is funding other kids for free if its no better??

the public school funding is there ... for all the kids ... you chose to forgo it for private that is your choice and you should pay.

Even if everyone paid the same amount of tax you still wouldn't have a valid point.

Of course it's valid, simply arguing that ones point isn't valid without an explanation why it is not is in itself not a valid argument ...

if I provide for your kids and you decide to take your kids elsewehre why should I provide more?

Yee-gods but that's the point Exclaim

You are not providing more funding you (as a tax-payer) are providing less. 70% less. Roll Eyes

Govt is chartered to provide education for every Australian child. Every Australian kid is entitled to the same education dollar from the Govt regardless of who their parents are or how the education is delivered.

Where is the proviso that every child must receive the same dollar amount?? It is nice to make these things up to suit your argument. By that argument, if govt's spend $1million per prisoner to keep them in jail, we should all receive $1million? That would be fair wouldn't it? Why should I pay for them and not get any myself?

Govt. must provide education for every child, you must send your child to school, if you chose not to use govt. schooling that is your choice. You want equal dollars, send them to public schools.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Swagman Gold Member Offline Beware of cheap imitations...... Posts: 15095 Illawarra NSW Gender:	Re: Elite Schools Spend $20 Million A Year On Upgrades Reply #149 - Mar 21^st, 2013 at 9:48am John Smith wrote on Mar 21^st, 2013 at 8:57am: Govt. must provide education for every child, you must send your child to school, if you chose not to use govt. schooling that is your choice. You want equal dollars, send them to public schools No I just vote for the Coalition.
Back to top	IP Logged